Jump to content

Well, at least he felt safe...


magley64

Recommended Posts

It's not? Please enlighten me...

I'm not familiar with your warm and fuzzy military of equals so let's start a committee and talk about how/when/ or even whether this order should be followed.

They must not have article 92

Have you served?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on Magley's beliefs, we better stop walking, running, standing, sitting, breathing, etc, etc.

http://www.actionamerica.org/guns/gun-web-widget.shtml

you shouldn't stop doing anything that fulfills your life...

I ride a motorcycle regardless of the risks, because it fulfills my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Magz, I'm sorry, but just because you know people who served doesn't mean you can automatically put yourself in the head of those that have. That's arrogant presumption at best.

Agree, but I'm not completely without knowledge on the subject.

The "have you served" question was a way of telling me that I don't have sufficient knowledge to discuss such matters. Even though I've provided evidence that military personnel have and will fire on civilians of this country and other countries, armed or unarmed, even without orders, but especially under orders. Now we can talk about whether that order will ever come... which I doubt... but what I don't doubt is whether it would be followed. Without question, and with complete US military precision...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree, but I'm not completely without knowledge on the subject.

The "have you served" question was a way of telling me that I don't have sufficient knowledge to discuss such matters.

You do not.

Even though I've provided evidence that military personnel have and will fire on civilians of this country and other countries, armed or unarmed, even without orders, but especially under orders. Now we can talk about whether that order will ever come... which I doubt... but what I don't doubt is whether it would be followed. Without question, and with complete US military precision...

Citing Kent State is misguided at best. You have found a very isolated and very regrettable incident and assumed that it is SOP for our military. Kent State was a black mark in military history and US history.

I served in the USMC infantry in a Company of highly trained Marines. I cannot envision a scenario where those I served with would fire on US citizens orders or not.

The 'mindless following of orders' is nothing but a stereotype that is only believed by those with ZERO first hand knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Admiral yamamoto of the japanese military.... " you cannot invade the mainland united states. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass". Thats a quote for you liberal idiots...... I dont want the damn goverment being my only fkn protection! Its our land to protect....PERiOD. And yes you asshat..... Eventually the goverment will get to big for its own good and will will go door to door taking weapons because thats the only true way they could control the population. Dont beleive me move your happy ass to russia sometime......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of the accuracy of the Admiral Yamamoto Quote about a rifle behind every blade of grass, if the battle of Midway would not have been won so decisively by the US, the Japanese invasion would be been unsuccessful because of an armed citizenry.

The 2nd amendment protects the citizens from the government above all else. The key to controlling a population is by taking away the means to forming a resistance. You are naive to think that we are beyond this.

Yes it is sad to think that some guy killed his family member, but his mistake. It happens. In the eyes of the law this is no different than a negligent homicide in a car. Plain and simple the gov't needs to be smaller, states need to have more power and the Constitution needs to be more strictly adhered to.

Your thoughts on the military are out of line and offensive. Martial Law is the bigger problem than the military shooting anyone. Federalization of the National Guard is a huge issue, that is not their role at all. Their role is to be the militia to defend the states rights FROM the national Govt, under the control of the governor of the state. This is why federal military units cannot be deployed inside the US unless under Marital Law, that is why during natural disasters the National Guard is deployed under control of the Governor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@cheech

The ten year civil war comment was in reference to magley comment about the 2000 service members and 10 years. Fighting here against your own people would be more deadly and take more time.

What about the oath keepers is wrong? I know members and gave listened to the founder interviewed about 6 times about an hour each time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will tell you this from my oath that i swore to protect the united states and its citizens from all threats foreign and domestic. The UCMJ ourlines the rules of engagement and all our soldiers are entitled with following lawfully given orders. If a citizen of the us was targeted there would be a through vetting of that order on all sides, officer and enlisted. The officer would vette it making sure the order is lawful with the assistance of jag. The enlisted would second guess. But if their upper enlisted ranked officers felt it was lawful they would convey that over to the lower. Someone will disagree with me but i know from experience the above situation happened during the first deplyment i was on in support of OIF/OEF. i was a gun mount captain in charge of a mk48 grenade launcher and a browning .50 cal mounted gun for ship transits and general quarters.

sent from my galaxy s 3 using tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree, but I'm not completely without knowledge on the subject.

The "have you served" question was a way of telling me that I don't have sufficient knowledge to discuss such matters. Even though I've provided evidence that military personnel have and will fire on civilians of this country and other countries, armed or unarmed, even without orders, but especially under orders. Now we can talk about whether that order will ever come... which I doubt... but what I don't doubt is whether it would be followed.

You're portending actions of the military to execute hypothetical orders that have never existed in the last 42 years (Kent State shootings, and even that is controversial whether there was shoot order or not) without the full and complete background that comes with serving and actually going through those motions to determine whether or not modern soldiers would fire on US citizens in present-day.

Just because I read a book and hung around Michael Jordan, doesn't mean I know what it's like to sink the game-winning buzzer against the Cavs in 1989.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Admiral yamamoto of the japanese military.... " you cannot invade the mainland united states. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass". Thats a quote for you liberal idiots...... I dont want the damn goverment being my only fkn protection! Its our land to protect....PERiOD. And yes you asshat..... Eventually the goverment will get to big for its own good and will will go door to door taking weapons because thats the only true way they could control the population. Dont beleive me move your happy ass to russia sometime......

Ah yes, the impotent rage. Starts out sane, goes down derpy.

If you're concerned about the government "going door to door taking weapons", why don't YOU move YOUR happy ass to Somalia? You can carve out a nice niche all to yourself, with all the guns and whatever you want. Government's a thousand miles away there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@cheech

The ten year civil war comment was in reference to magley comment about the 2000 service members and 10 years. Fighting here against your own people would be more deadly and take more time.

What about the oath keepers is wrong? I know members and gave listened to the founder interviewed about 6 times about an hour each time.

I'm just saying that some of their elements are more extreme than others, so much to the point that they've found themselves on the SPLC's radar as a group of interest. You don't get to that point by being rational, you get to that point by threatening violence against a group of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just saying that some of their elements are more extreme than others, so much to the point that they've found themselves on the SPLC's radar as a group of interest. You don't get to that point by being rational, you get to that point by threatening violence against a group of people.

He covered that in one or two of those interviews and just like you said there are examples of extremism and try try hard to quell that and remove members that are trumpeting ideals agaisnt their beliefs. According to the founder the majority of instances turn out to be nonmembers associating themselves with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, he would definitely eliminate any military target to which he was ordered. He's very effective, and very determined.

Since you seem to love hypotheticals...

Let's say there was a military initiative to eliminate know-it-all-trolls from OR . And YOU were identified as a military target. Would said cousin, who apparently does not posess free will or the cognitive ability to make decisions, eliminate you?

2832791776_e455500c6a.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you seem to love hypotheticals...

Let's say there was a military initiative to eliminate know-it-all-trolls from OR . And YOU were identified as a military target. Would said cousin, who apparently does not posess free will or the cognitive ability to make decisions, eliminate you?

I'd like to believe he'd make an exception for family members... but then again, who knows?

I still don't get the disconnect...

"I don't trust the government, except for that one unelected wing of the government with all the deadly weapons. I completely trust those guys":confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to believe he'd make an exception for family members... but then again, who knows?

You do, or at least you did a couple hours ago.

But, my dad went to paris island, my cousin has been in the army for 10 years now, one of my best friends was navy for 8 years... I've got a pretty good grip on what the score is.
Individual soldiers are not there to make decisions about whether an order is to be followed or not...they follow orders, that's what makes them effective.
Yep, he would definitely eliminate any military target to which he was ordered. He's very effective, and very determined.

Any town in iraq, any town in afghanistan, any town in germany, your hometown, my hometown, if there is a military target there, and he gets ordered to eliminate it...it's gone.

That's not leaving a lot of wiggle room, which underscores your lack of experience.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...